Title

Author

Abstract

On-demand binding requires books to be printed and finished in quick turnaround time. In order to serve the on-demand binding market, the binders have the options of hot melt adhesives or cold emulsion adhesives. Cold emulsion adhesive bookbinding has been available in the industry for a long time. In the past few years, this type of binding process was more favorable as compared to hot melt because of its durability, flexibility, and strength. But the process of cold emulsion binding faced a serious drawback of curing time where the bound bookblock requires a minimum of two hrs. of curing time before trimming when books are cured naturally. As of recent technological advancement, it is possible now to bind a book by cold emulsion adhesive and trim it in 15 minutes after forced cured. This process is offered by Planax North America, Inc. There has been no testing done where the study evaluates the two different curing processes for cold emulsion adhesives, namely natural curing and accelerated curing on a preheated plate. Consequently, this thesis research investigates both curing processes. The purpose of this study is to evaluate which curing process is better suited for cold emulsion adhesives. This was accomplished by comparing page-pull and page-flex values taken from thirty five books cured by each curing process (total of seventy books). Moffett page-pull and page-flex testing equipment were used for this test. It was found that natural curing resulted in higher page-pull values whereas forced curing resulted in higher page-flex. However, it was noticed that both types of curing process resulted in page-pull and page-flex values within the recommended industrial bookbinding guidelines. It can be inferred that on-demand books can be cured by forced curing which ultimately results into faster turnaround for production benefits yet books are within the industrial guidelines in regard to page-pull and page-flex strength values.

Author Corner

RIT Links

NOTICE: We are currently experiencing issues regarding the readability of PDF files in the Chrome and Firefox browsers, and Adobe Reader. We are in the process of addressing this situation; in the meantime, we recommend using Internet Explorer or Safari, or Adobe Acrobat when viewing PDFs on RIT Scholar Works. If you have any questions or concerns, you can email us at .